mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Adaptive Data Analysis in a Balanced Adversarial Model

arXiv 2305.15452 ↗First posted 24 May 2023cs.LG cs.CR cs.DScited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In adaptive data analysis, a mechanism gets n i.i.d. samples from an unknown distribution D, and is required to provide accurate estimations to a sequence of adaptively chosen statistical queries with respect to D. Hardt and Ullman (FOCS 2014) and Steinke and Ullman (COLT 2015) showed that in general, it is computationally hard to answer more than Theta(n2) adaptive queries, assuming the existence of one-way functions. However, these negative results strongly rely on an adversarial model that significantly advantages the adversarial analyst over the mechanism, as the analyst, who chooses the adaptive queries, also chooses the underlying distribution D. This imbalance raises questions with respect to the applicability of the obtained hardness results -- an analyst who has complete knowledge of the underlying distribution D would have little need, if at all, to issue statistical queries to a mechanism which only holds a finite number of samples from D. We consider more restricted adversaries, called balanced, where each such adversary consists of two separated algorithms: The sampler who is the entity that chooses the distribution and provides the samples to the mechanism, and the analyst who chooses the adaptive queries, but has no prior knowledge of the underlying distribution (and hence has no a priori advantage with respect to the mechanism). We improve the quality of previous lower bounds by revisiting them using an efficient balanced adversary, under standard public-key cryptography assumptions. We show that these stronger hardness assumptions are unavoidable in the sense that any computationally bounded balanced adversary that has the structure of all known attacks, implies the existence of public-key cryptography.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 May 2023.

Builds on

21 of 47 references.

References · 21

  1. 2014Preserving Statistical Validity in Adaptive Data Analysiscited by 103
  2. 2015Algorithmic Stability for Adaptive Data Analysiscited by 88
  3. 2015Generalization in Adaptive Data Analysis and Holdout Reusecited by 83
  4. 2015Between Pure and Approximate Differential Privacycited by 56
  5. 2019A New Analysis of Differential Privacy's Generalization Guaranteescited by 36
  6. 2014Interactive Fingerprinting Codes and the Hardness of Preventing False Discoverycited by 35
  7. 2014Preventing False Discovery in Interactive Data Analysis is Hardcited by 34
  8. 2017Calibrating Noise to Variance in Adaptive Data Analysiscited by 29
  9. 2016Max-Information, Differential Privacy, and Post-Selection Hypothesis Testingcited by 27
  10. 2017Generalization for Adaptively-chosen Estimators via Stable Mediancited by 26
  11. 2021Dynamic Algorithms Against an Adaptive Adversary: Generic Constructions and Lower Boundscited by 17
  12. 2018The Limits of Post-Selection Generalizationcited by 16
9 more
  1. 2020A bounded-noise mechanism for differential privacycited by 15
  2. 2021Separating Adaptive Streaming from Oblivious Streamingcited by 9
  3. 2022Adaptive Data Analysis with Correlated Observationscited by 9
  4. 2023On Differential Privacy and Adaptive Data Analysis with Bounded Spacecited by 9
  5. 2023Subsampling Suffices for Adaptive Data Analysiscited by 9
  6. 2017Sampling Without Compromising Accuracy in Adaptive Data Analysiscited by 6
  7. 2017Information, Privacy and Stability in Adaptive Data Analysiscited by 4
  8. 2016Challenges in Bayesian Adaptive Data Analysiscited by 3
  9. 2021On the Complexity of Two-Party Differential Privacycited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

5 papers.